The impact of childhood obesity on human capital in high‐income countries: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current evidence of the impact of childhood obesity on human capital development does not point in a consistent direction, and its interpretation is challenging. We carried out a systematic review of studies from high-income countries that used robust causal inference approaches to assess the impact of childhood overweight and obesity on outcomes typically linked to human capital development in economics. Global Health, Medline and EconLit were used to search for peer-reviewed papers. Three reviewers independently assessed study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Nineteen papers representing 22 studies met the inclusion criteria. Included studies were categorized based on three components of human capital: cognitive performance (n = 18), measured through test scores; educational attainment (n = 3), through grade progression and college completion; and labour market outcomes (n = 1), through wages. We find that childhood overweight and obesity hinder education outcomes, with effects mostly observed at older ages of exposure measurement (12+ years). Girls with overweight and obesity experienced larger negative effects and more often than boys. Future research should elucidate the pathways through which childhood obesity impacts human capital development, to support policies that may mitigate those impacts, thus averting social costs that are currently widespread, increasing and unaccounted for.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".